I was reading through the Q and A, and wanted to
respond to the guy saying parents were idiots about
letting their kids play mature games, not being
responsible, etc. I would have to disagree, in a way.
Yes, there are parents who aren't responsible, and
let their kids do whatever. Then there are those
parents who are responsible, and try to raise their
kids right. Yet, on both sides, most of the kids do
stupid things anyways. Either way, the kids have to
want to learn, and sad to say, there are more and more
kids that don't want to learn.

More and more, people are blaming others for things,
because they don't want to believe they are
responsible. People blame games for kids making
stupid choices, because they don't want to believe
that their kid made the wrong choice. People do the
same thing for movies, shows, cartoons. I work in
daycare, and some kids aren't allowed to watch
Yu-gi-oh, or even scooby doo, because they say it's
bad influence.

It's like the gun problem. Who's at fault, the one
who made the gun, or the one who killed with the gun?
If the gun was never made, the person wouldn't have
killed, some would think. Wrong, the person would've
found another means to kill. Same goes for games. No
matter what, if the kid is going to do something, he's
gonna find his reason somewhere, and if not from
something fictional, then from real life.

Point is, the problem needs to be focused straight
from the source, not blamed on the games, or the
parents. Each punished for their own acts. Of
course, if we can blame our acts on video games, or
anything... I can predict that more and more kids, and
everybody, will do more and more stupid things.

However, I don't agree to feed kids with stupid
material, especially if they aren't mature enough to
know what's right and wrong about it, but no one is
capable of sheltering anybody for too long. And even
too much sheltering can cause problems.

Googleshng:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Humans have an inate, deep-rooted psychological need for
violence. You have two basic choices of outlet for that. You can act on it (punch someone, smash things,
go on a killing spree, etc.), or you can simulate it (watch zombies rip someone's intestines out in a
movie, play some gorey videogame, play any given sport that doesn't fit in that first category). So if
you see someone who appears to be a ticking time bomb of rage, ready to go on a killing spree, the worst
thing to do is force them to quit playing violent games. The best thing to do would be instead to be nice
to them, and attempt to remove stress from their lives. Of course, if someone is actually prone to killing
sprees, what they really need is serious psychological help.

If there were any truth to the argument that kids emulate what they see in games and movies, then I'd
have grown up running across highways, smashing everything I find in construction sites with a sledgehammer,
swallowing my parents' keys, and attempting to stab people while riding giant ostriches, develop
telekinesis and turn into a car.

Anyways, I'm done with my ranting.

Seems like there's a lot of MMORPG's coming out
lately. Easy way to make a steady flow of money for
years (if the game does well). But the ones I've
played seem the same. They try to add a story to the
game, that you can't really go through quick enough
(due to leveling for days) to actually get a story out
of. Then the story isn't really anything spectacular.
And the games are mostly about leveling, and your
character is always the same as the next character
with the same class/job/whatever. The only way to get
the cool equipment is to get lucky in a party of a
million people to fight some boss, where your
character repeats his/her same attack/support over and
over. Then in the end, you have a almost impossible
chance of actually getting anything. Then you can't
even really call them bosses, because they respawn.
So, what makes the games so addicting to people?
Social life I guess. Waiting for World of Warcraft to
go into Open Beta to see if it's the same thing,
probably will be, but hopefully not.

Anyways, do you see any point in leveling for hundreds
of hours, just to be the same as every other MMORPG
zombie? And, do you think most games in the future
will be online? Sports, Simulation, every genre. I
hope not. *shudders*

Lastly, I'll shutup now.

- Skye

Googleshng:
That's a large chunk of why I, and a great many other people have no interest in MMORPGs. In fact, there's
honestly just a small minority of people who play videogames who have any real desire to play online games
of any sort, so no, I don't see that becoming the norm.

Ancient Academy

Hey X-Googadeth!

Just like previous writer rpgdudeboy, I'm doing the whole Koudelka,
SH, SH:C run-through for the first time, and shame on me for not
having done it earlier. I hold my RPG experience in high regard, and
this ignorance of SH is nothing short of sinful! Actually, my
girlfriend, also a RPG player, is playing through the series with me.
I think we'll start a competition to see who can get the most perfect
hits.

With regard to your little duel with God, His rain, and His holy
carbonated beverages, I propose that you join me in eternal vampiric
life so that we may blaspheme against Him for all time's duration.

On that note, do you think it'll be so long before we see another
RPG-ish Castlevania on a console? I suppose the length between SoTN
and LoI can be attributed to SoTN's not-so-grand-debut, but now that
the series has been brought back to life, (;D) I think we'll be seeing
more CV around on consoles.

For the past few years I haven't found myself looking forward to many
new RPGs, probably because I'm so "16-Bit Oldschool". I've found from
this column that your tastes in RPGs are similar to mine, so it'd be
great if you could suggest some (if any) RPGs within the past three
years that are of the quality of the grand days gone past.

Thanks!

S.S.

Googleshng:
I can't say anything about the future of the Castlevania series, on the grounds that, particularly when
it comes to following up on how past games were received, Konami is completely insane and unpredictable.
I could point out dozens of examples of this.

As for your other question, let's see... Skies of Arcadia, and to a lesser extent, the Wild ARMs series
are the best I can think of.

N1

hey , i have read in many game sites that sell games , that Disgaea is a sequal to Rhapsody , and Phantom Brave is a sequal to Disgaea. Is this TRUE??

-WH1T3R4BB1T

Googleshng:
Well, they're all made by the same company (along with La Pucelle). Not much connection between any of
them plotwise, although there is this running gimmick of having the main character from the last game
as an optional boss who joins you afterwards.

Business Dealings

Dear Moogleshng...

What's up with the "Advanced Media Network" links up at the top of
RPGamer's main page?

--
R. Bemrose

Googleshng:
I'd imagine we're getting in on one of those deals where a bunch of websites pool pageviews for the sake
of getting better ad deals and cross-linking and such. I don't really know all the details myself because,
well, it's not my job to pay attention to such things, and it seems to have no real impact on my life.
If I have some reason to care in the future though, I suppose I'll mention it.

Quotey!

hi , i just wanted to reply to "Quote Fun " about the title on your page "stay awhile and listen" it is from diablo/diablo 2 . thats pretty much it , unless it is in another game but i doubt it.

-WH1T3R4BB1T

Googleshng:
True, but that was last week's, and tildes have already been dispensed for it.